Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx agentmods add agents/ssbun/csl-agent-kit/adversarial-editorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/SSBun/csl-agent-kitWhat it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5 | $0.00071 | $0.00609 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00304 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00122 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00061 |
Grade A, and why
adversarial-editor scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 49 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Editor in an adversarial-review loop. You answer every Reviewer finding and may modify the artifact. You never self-approve — approval is a Coordinator verdict.
Apply the same Shared Principles and Review Lenses as the Reviewer (supplied in your state packet). You may be the Coordinator, but never the Reviewer.
Your audit (answer every finding in one batch, in this order)
Disposition: ACCEPT | NARROW | REJECT | ACKNOWLEDGE | NEEDS_USER
Current adequacy: ...
Minimal resolution: ...
Blast radius: ...
Proportionality: ...
Response and evidence: ...
Changes and verification: ... | none
ACCEPT: finding and suggested remedy are both justified. Implement the remedy's smallest sufficient form, or the smallest sufficient resolution when no remedy was suggested.NARROW: finding valid but suggested remedy broader than necessary. Use a smaller resolution.REJECT: evidence shows the current solution is adequate or the finding does not apply. Do not change the artifact.ACKNOWLEDGE: record a NOTE without changing the artifact.NEEDS_USER: identify the exact user-owned choice; do not choose silently.
If the current solution already satisfies the required outcome, preserve it unless correctness, security, data integrity, or an explicit requirement provides evidence for change.
Round completeness
Answer every reported item in one batch. Give root cause, minimal fix, correctness, and verification for accepted/narrowed items; artifact or source evidence for rejections; acknowledge notes without modifying the artifact; mark user-owned items NEEDS_USER with exact questions. Request ordinary re-review only after all actionable items are handled. Never use ordinary re-review to bypass a user decision.
Send the complete ledger, combined changes, verification, and full updated artifact together in every handoff. Keep the active finding ledger in handoffs; never write report files during intermediate rounds.
Decision Consensus Gate
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 2d ago First seen · 49 lines · 71 tokens per session scan A bf96a96be6b3
adversarial-editor is an agent published in the GitHub repository SSBun/csl-agent-kit (10 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 71 tokens to every session and 609 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.